Update Breast Cancer 2021 Part 3 - Current Developments in the Treatment of Early Breast Cancer: Review and Assessment of Specialised Treatment Scenarios by an International Expert Panel.

The continuous availability of findings from new studies repeatedly results in updated treatment recommendations and guidelines. In the case of breast carcinoma in particular, several studies have been published in the last few years that have transformed how early and advanced breast carcinoma is being treated. However, this by no means means implies that there is agreement among all experts on specific issues. It is precisely the diversity of interpretation of guidelines and study findings that reflects the constantly changing available data and its complexity, as well as the availability of new drugs. In recent years, new substances such as pertuzumab, T-DM1, neratinib and capecitabine have become available to treat patients with early stages of breast carcinoma. Furthermore, the first results on the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors for adjuvant treatment have now been published. Last but not least, the use of multigene tests to avoid the necessity of chemotherapy in certain patients is still under discussion. This review summarises the state of the data and publishes the results of the survey completed by experts at the 2021 St. Gallen Breast Cancer Conference on early-stage breast cancer.

Neratinib as extended adjuvant therapy in patients with copositive early breast cancer: German health technology assessment-driven analyses from the ExteNET study.

BACKGROUND: Neratinib is approved in the European Union for extended adjuvant treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive/hormone receptor-positive (copositive) early breast cancer ≤1 year of completion of prior trastuzumab-based therapy. Here, we report analyses of the hormone receptor-positive subgroup (N = 1631) from the ExteNET trial performed for the German health technology assessment (HTA). RESULTS: With 2 years of median follow-up, HTA analyses revealed a significant advantage in disease-free survival (DFS) for neratinib vs. placebo (absolute/relative risk reduction: 4.1/48.2%; hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval {CI}]: 0.45 [0.29; 0.69]; p = 0.0002), consistent with distant DFS (absolute/relative risk reduction: 3.1/46.3%; HR [95% CI]: 0.52 [0.32; 0.84]; p = 0.0082). The 5-year follow-up confirmed this outcome.Quality of life analyses did not show clinically relevant differences over all time points. Only at month 1, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General total score revealed a statistically relevant difference to the disadvantage of neratinib classified as clinically relevant. The tolerability profile of neratinib was dominated by gastrointestinal events, mainly diarrhoea (all grades: 94.4%; grade III: 39.4%; no systematic antidiarrhoeal prophylaxis), nausea (all grades/grade III: 43.9/1.6%), vomiting (26.6/3.2%), abdominal pain (23.8/1.9%), fatigue (28.1/1.9%) and rash (14.3/0.4%). No cumulative or irreversible toxicities were observed. As shown in the CONTROL study and instituted via a risk management plan, diarrhoea management can reduce frequency, cumulative duration and severity of diarrhoea. CONCLUSION: Extended adjuvant neratinib provides a clinically relevant benefit with further incremental reduction of relapse risk in the curative setting. Accordingly, the German HTA authority has granted an added benefit for this new treatment option.

Heregulin (HRG) assessment for clinical trial eligibility testing in a molecular registry (PRAEGNANT) in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Eligibility criteria are a critical part of clinical trials, as they define the patient population under investigation. Besides certain patient characteristics, clinical trials often include biomarker testing for eligibility. However, patient-identification mostly relies on the trial site itself and is often a time-consuming procedure, which could result in missing out on potentially eligible patients. Pre-selection of those patients using a registry could facilitate the process of eligibility testing and increase the number of identified patients. One aim with the PRAEGNANT registry (NCT02338167) is to identify patients for therapies based on clinical and molecular data. Here, we report eligibility testing for the SHERBOC trial using the German PRAEGNANT registry. METHODS: Heregulin (HRG) has been reported to identify patients with better responses to therapy with the anti-HER3 monoclonal antibody seribantumab (MM-121). The SHERBOC trial investigated adding seribantumab (MM-121) to standard therapy in patients with advanced HER2-negative, hormone receptor-positive (HR-positive) breast cancer and HRG overexpression. The PRAEGNANT registry was used for identification and tumor testing, helping to link potential HRG positive patients to the trial. Patients enrolled in PRAEGNANT have invasive and metastatic or locally advanced, inoperable breast cancer. Patients eligible for SHERBOC were identified by using the registry. Study aims were to describe the HRG positivity rate, screening procedures, and patient characteristics associated with inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: Among 2769 unselected advanced breast cancer patients, 650 were HER2-negative, HR-positive and currently receiving first- or second-line treatment, thus potentially eligible for SHERBOC at the end of current treatment; 125 patients also met further clinical eligibility criteria (e.g. menopausal status, ECOG). In the first/second treatment lines, patients selected for SHERBOC based on further eligibility criteria had a more favorable prognosis than those not selected. HRG status was tested in 38 patients, 14 of whom (36.8%) proved to be HRG-positive. CONCLUSION: Using a real-world breast cancer registry allowed identification of potentially eligible patients for SHERBOC focusing on patients with HER3 overexpressing, HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. This approach may provide insights into differences between patients eligible or non-eligible for clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials, NCT02338167 , Registered 14 January 2015 - retrospectively registered.

Update Breast Cancer 2019 Part 3 - Current Developments in Early Breast Cancer: Review and Critical Assessment by an International Expert Panel.

The treatment of breast cancer patients in a curative situation is special in many ways. The local therapy with surgery and radiation therapy is a central aspect of the treatment. The complete elimination of tumour cells at the site of the primary disease must be ensured while simultaneously striving to keep the long-term effects as minor as possible. There is still focus on the continued reduction of the invasiveness of local therapy. With regard to systemic therapy, chemotherapies with taxanes, anthracyclines and, in some cases, platinum-based chemotherapies have become established in the past couple of decades. The context for use is being continually further defined. Likewise, there are questions in the case of antihormonal therapy which also still need to be further defined following the introduction of aromatase inhibitors, such as the length of therapy or ovarian suppression in premenopausal patients. Finally, personalisation of the treatment of early breast cancer patients is also being increasingly used. Prognostic tests could potentially support therapeutic decisions. It must also be considered how the possible use of new therapies, such as checkpoint inhibitors and CDK4/6 inhibitors could look in practice once study results in this regard are available. This overview addresses the backgrounds on the current votes taken by the international St. Gallen panel of experts in Vienna in 2019 for current questions in the treatment of breast cancer patients in a curative situation.

An Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Tool for the FACT-B (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast) Questionnaire for Measuring the Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Breast Cancer: Reliability Study.

BACKGROUND: The most frequent malignant disease in women is breast cancer. In the metastatic setting, quality of life is the primary therapeutic goal, and systematic treatment has only a limited effect on survival rates; therefore, the concept of the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are gaining more and more importance in the therapy setting of diseases such as breast cancer. One of the frequently used questionnaires for measuring the HRQoL in patients with breast cancer is the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B). Currently, paper-based surveys still predominate, as only a few reliable and validated electronic-based questionnaires are available. ePRO tools for the FACT-B questionnaire with proven reliability are missing so far. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the reliability of tablet-based measurement of FACT-B in the German language in adjuvant (curative) and metastatic breast cancer patients. METHODS: Paper- and tablet-based questionnaires were completed by a total of 106 female adjuvant and metastatic breast cancer patients. All patients were required to complete the electronically based (ePRO) and paper-based version of the FACT-B. A frequency analysis was performed to determine descriptive sociodemographic characteristics. Both dimensions of reliability (parallel forms reliability using Wilcoxon test and test of internal consistency using Spearman ρ) and agreement rates for single items, Kendall tau for each subscale, and total score were analyzed. RESULTS: High correlations were shown for both dimensions of reliability (parallel forms reliability and internal consistency) in the patients' response behavior between paper-based and electronically based questionnaires. Regarding the reliability test of parallel forms, no significant differences were found in 35 of 37 single items, while significant correlations in the test for consistency were found in all 37 single items, in all 5 sum individual item subscale scores, as well as in total FACT-B score. CONCLUSIONS: The ePRO version of the FACT-B questionnaire is reliable for patients with breast cancer in both adjuvant and metastatic settings, showing highly significant correlations with the paper-based version in almost all questions all subscales and the total score.